Creationists: Explain how the designer created and/or modified living things on Earth

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

"God didn't do it" is not a claim made by science.

It is an assumption that drives their claims. Secular scientists assume that God doesn't exist therefore they assume that "God didn't do it." As a result, all scientific claims are made with these assumptions in mind.

 

[Speedwell]

It is an assumption that drives their claims. Secular scientists assume that God doesn't exist therefore they assume that "God didn't do it." As a result, all scientific claims are made with these assumptions in mind.

No, the question of God's existence just doesn't come up in scientific discourse. It's an unfalsifiable proposition and has no business there anyway. As usual, this discussion is not really about God's existence or His authorship of our being; it's about the Bible and how some Christians think it should be interpreted.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

No, the question of God's existence just doesn't come up in scientific discourse. It's an unfalsifiable proposition and has no business there anyway. As usual, this discussion is not really about God's existence or His authorship of our being; it's about the Bible and how some Christians think it should be interpreted.

Is the discussion about the Bible and how it should be interpreted? Because I am fairly certain the discussion is about how God created and/or modified living things on earth. My argument regarding biblical interpretation is that the intent of Genesis was never about explaining how God created the universe and life on earth. Rather, the intent has always been why. The "how" is not relevant to the purpose of the metanarrative.

 

[Speedwell]

That's what Yasser Arafat thought about Israel.

"Israel? there because of fulfillment of prophecy??? Ha! She has no business being there!"

And Mr. Arafat got a good dose of cause-and-effect, didn't he?

But rather than academia learning from its mistakes, academia keeps right on ignoring this scientific principle, and will one day join Mr. Arafat in the Lake of Misfit Collegians.

Saying that the existence of God is an unfalsifiable proposition is a way of saying that the existence of God can never be disproven by science. I wouldn't have thought that was something you would disagree with.

 

[Yttrium]

It is an assumption that drives their claims. Secular scientists assume that God doesn't exist therefore they assume that "God didn't do it." As a result, all scientific claims are made with these assumptions in mind.

You know, if you replaced all non-religious scientists with Christians, science would still work the same way. The whole purpose of science is to try to find natural explanations for things, because we can't test the supernatural. That's not denying the existence of God, that's just being practical.

 

[pitabread]

To answer the question as to whether or not God selectively breeds animals is difficult to answer seeing how you do not want to hear biblical references. The Bible suggests that the answer is yes but as you stated in the OP, you are not interested to hear about what the Bible says.

I'm already familiar with what the Bible says so I really don't need it quoted to me. While it doesn't explicitly say anything about God selectively breeding animals, we can explore this all the same.

So how did God go about it? Does God use the same process that human breeders use today? Or is some other process used?

Which life forms did God breed? Did God start with a single celled organism and start from there? Were more complex life forms used? Which are the result of this selective breeding and which are not?

 

[Speedwell]

You know, if you replaced all non-religious scientists with Christians, science would still work the same way. The whole purpose of science is to try to find natural explanations for things, because we can't test the supernatural. That's not denying the existence of God, that's just being practical.

And those many scientists who are already Christian have no problem with it. Creationism is not about the existence of God, it's about the Bible.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

You know, if you replaced all non-religious scientists with Christians, science would still work the same way. The whole purpose of science is to try to find natural explanations for things, because we can't test the supernatural. That's not denying the existence of God, that's just being practical.

I agree. Which is why I originally asked the question as to what the OP hoped to accomplish.

 

[AV1611VET]

Saying that the existence of God is an unfalsifiable proposition is a way of saying that the existence of God can never be disproven by science.

It can't.

I wouldn't have thought that was something you would disagree with.

I wasn't aware I was saying that, but if so ... kindly disregard.

 

[Yttrium]

I agree. Which is why I originally asked the question as to what the OP hoped to accomplish.

Ah. I must admit that my standards for a "valid explanation" aren't as strict as those in the OP. I expect the explanation to fit the evidence we find. Even if the explanation includes the supernatural, as long as it fits the evidence, it's okay in my book. It's not science if it includes the supernatural, but that doesn't prevent it from being a valid explanation.

The OP is looking for a more stringent explanation to qualify as a valid explanation, along the lines of a scientific theory, and that can't happen because supernatural.

 

[pitabread]

The OP is looking for a more stringent explanation to qualify as a valid explanation, along the lines of a scientific theory, and that can't happen because supernatural.

To me a valid explanation has to include the how. That's what I'm trying to get at.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

I'm already familiar with what the Bible says so I really don't need it quoted to me. While it doesn't explicitly say anything about God selectively breeding animals, we can explore this all the same.

So how did God go about it? Does God use the same process that human breeders use today? Or is some other process used?

Which life forms did God breed? Did God start with a single celled organism and start from there? Were more complex life forms used? Which are the result of this selective breeding and which are not?

The simple answer to the question is that I do not know. I personally lean towards an "apparent age" theory young earth theistic creationism (if you need an explanation on "apparent age theory" I would be happy to provide one). However, whether through the creation of a single celled organism or by molding a human being from clay, the process may be helpful to better understanding God through His creations but it is ultimately irrelevant to our salvation. There is much debate on God's sovereignty. The fact that God is sovereign essentially means that He has the power, wisdom, and authority to do anything He chooses within His creation. Whether or not He actually exerts that level of control in any given circumstance is actually a completely different question. Often, the concept of divine sovereignty is oversimplified. We tend to assume that, if God is not directly, overtly, purposefully driving some event, then He is somehow not sovereign. So in response to your question, because I know I went a little out of the way, is that the bible suggests that God has a hand in all of creation because of his preeminence over all of creation. However, to what extent does God actively determine the decisions of His creation is debatable.

 

[Yttrium]

To me a valid explanation has to include the how. That's what I'm trying to get at.

Well, the how is supernatural. It's not explainable. It's an omnipotent intelligence doing whatever an omnipotent intelligence wants.

We still have all sorts of unknowns in science that we skirt around. Why does matter have gravity? How does quantum tunneling work? Why is the speed of light in a vacuum the same for every observer? Sometimes an explanation just has to work with what we've got.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

To me a valid explanation has to include the how. That's what I'm trying to get at.

That is a fair question to ask. However, biblically it has never been about "How". Rather, it has always been about why? Science can explain the how. But in regards to life, it cannot explain why? Because "why" implies a purpose and purpose implies that an intelligent being bestowed a purpose onto that creation. This, of course, goes far beyond the scope of physical science and into the metaphysical.

 

[pitabread]

Well, the how is supernatural. It's not explainable. It's an omnipotent intelligence doing whatever an omnipotent intelligence wants.

There is still interaction with the physical world though if the output is supposed to be physical things. It's not purely supernatural.

We still have all sorts of unknowns in science that we skirt around. Why does matter have gravity? How does quantum tunneling work? Why is the speed of light in a vacuum the same for every observer? Sometimes an explanation just has to work with what we've got.

Sure, there are loads of unknowns and continual research into how the universe works. That's what makes the universe so interesting; always new things to learn.

 

[pitabread]

That is a fair question to ask. However, biblically it has never been about "How". Rather, it has always been about why? Science can explain the how. But in regards to life, it cannot explain why? Because "why" implies a purpose and purpose implies that an intelligent being bestowed a purpose onto that creation. This, of course, goes far beyond the scope of physical science and into the metaphysical.

There are creationists on this forum though that make it about how. I started this thread specifically in response to a post here: Why Argue Against Evolution and a Natural Origin?

great. so we can explain anything in biology by creation too. and thus we dont need evolution to explain it.

These sorts of claims pop up. When they do, I'm interested to see what sorts of explanations creationists have for things.

 

[BigRed009]

Once again I see creationists claiming that "creation" is a valid explanation for life on Earth.

Therefore creationists should be able to explain the mechanisms, processes, forces, etc, involved in the creation and/or modification of living things on Earth via a designer.

Disclaimer: Not interested in Bible quotes. I know what the Bible says and it doesn't explain anything. If you want to invoke God "speaking" things into existence or shaping people out of clay, you need to explain the mechanism, processes, forces, etc behind such an act.

What makes you think that the validity of creationism lies with our ability to explain it's nature? You're looking for a natural science explanation for the supernatural. We weren't there when God made Adam. We weren't there when God made the earth and everything on it. We are the creation, not the Creator.

Yes, the Bible states that God can speak creation into existance, and form beings out of clay for example. However, if you need a more detailed, mechanical/scientific illustration that you or anyone else can comprehend, you may be waiting a very long time.

We don't know how God created anything, but many of us have seen Him work in our lives by how He's changed us individually: through His word, personal miracles, healing, trials, and the people He's put in our lives; just as examples. These things build into our faith. We trust in Him because we believe in Him and that He will provide for us in such a way that is best for us.

I was in a period of my life not long ago where I was in deep depression, anguish, and misery. This was lasting for over seven months. Finally, when I told a friend I needed a miracle, he and some others in our Bible study prayed for me and the Lord healed me right there. One of my friends spoke in tongues and said that the Lord was telling her that the enemy was lying to me about my worth and that He was going to heal me and strengthen me. And He did. Right there.

My deep, crippling despair was gone that very night.

I wasn't hooked up to a machine that scans brainwaves. I don't have physical evidence to prove to you this happened. It's an example of how God strengthen my faith in Him. This is up to you to believe or not believe.

We hardly know what's beneath the oceans. How are we supposed to know how our Creator does His work? From His word we know His character, promises, and commands. His power is beyond our understanding.

I have faith that when I get into my car and turn the ignition, the engine will fire up and it will work. Not knowing how the engine operates doesn't make the concept of the engine invalid.

If you are genuinely interested in learning more about God, and the answers you have been given haven't satified you, then I will challenge you to simply open up to Him. There's no harm in praying and simply asking God to open yourself to Him. Is this something you've tried before or would be open to try?

P.S. I say this all with respect, btw. I'm not here to start arguments, but to simply state my perspective.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

There are creationists on this forum though that make it about how. I started this thread specifically in response to a post here: Why Argue Against Evolution and a Natural Origin?



These sorts of claims pop up. When they do, I'm interested to see what sorts of explanations creationists have for things.

I see that now. Yeah... I think it is best to leave the "How" questions to scientists and the "why" questions to theologians.

 

[pitabread]

What makes you think that the validity of creationism lies with our ability to explain it's nature?

What makes me think that is when creationists suggest that creationism offers explanatory power in lieu of the explanations derived from scientific inquiry.

If you have an issue with that, then take it up with some of the creationists on this forum.

If you are genuinely interested in learning more about God, and the answers you have been given haven't satified you, then I will challenge you to simply open up to Him. There's no harm in praying and simply asking God to open yourself to Him. Is this something you've tried before or would be open to try?

I have already spent my lifetime developing a personal philosophy that I am comfortable with. I don't expect anyone else to adopt my personal beliefs since they are based on my own personal journey and experiences. Likewise, I think it's presumptuous of others to assume I would adopt their beliefs based on their own experiences.

 

[pitabread]

I was in a period of my life not long ago where I was in deep depression, anguish, and misery.

Just as an aside, I notice this is a common theme to many religious stories (e.g. people at a low point in their life, turn to spiritual/religious beliefs as a solution, etc). It also seems to be a common evangelical technique used by many evangelists.

Forgive me for being clinical, but I've always wondered what sort of psychological feedback mechanisms may be at work at reinforcing people's beliefs through these sorts of experiences. Especially when it comes to those that undergo religious conversions as a result.